From owner-freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 2 07:16:15 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1103F16A4CF for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2004 07:16:15 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cocoa.syncrontech.com (cocoa-e0.syncrontech.com [62.71.8.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4957443D55 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2004 07:16:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ari@suutari.iki.fi) Received: from guinness.syncrontech.com (guinness.syncrontech.com [62.71.8.19])i827GBWw079608; Thu, 2 Sep 2004 10:16:11 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from ari@suutari.iki.fi) Received: from suutari.iki.fi (coffee.syncrontech.com [62.71.8.37]) i827GA0V064102; Thu, 2 Sep 2004 10:16:10 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from ari@suutari.iki.fi) Message-ID: <4136C8BA.4020403@suutari.iki.fi> Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 10:16:10 +0300 From: Ari Suutari User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040310) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ari Suutari References: <20040831120745.L66028@hawat.cc.ubbcluj.ro> <20040901072358.GA45042@anyware12.anyware> <20040901142643.GA80717@arabica.esil.univ-mrs.fr> <4136C50B.2050906@suutari.iki.fi> In-Reply-To: <4136C50B.2050906@suutari.iki.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.30 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.24 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) cc: dano@hawat.cc.ubbcluj.ro cc: freebsd-java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Java Communication API for FreeBSD Input Stream Problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-java@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting Java to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 07:16:15 -0000 Hi, I read the original problem from archives. If the original poster could comment which freebsd-commapi version he was using ? I have currently version 0.6 ready, which fixes some errors I made when I converted the C code to use select(2) instead of poll(2). These might be the reason for odd behaviour. Ari S.